<p>Well, ive visited both schools and now im just more split than ever. I could definitely fit at either of them. Im trying to compare the engineering programs between the two again but im totally lost on this. I know there isnt really a clearcut answer and I think ive heard all that there pretty much is to hear. A few people I talked to from caltech said its the sciences where caltech stands out, not so much the engineering. I dont know...what do yall think?</p>
<p>What type of engineering specifically?</p>
<p>Im pretty much undecided. Electrical, mechanical, aernautical/aerospace, chemical, computer science, applied/engineering physics, etc. Everything but civil engineering I think.</p>
<p>If both schools fit you equally...</p>
<p>Come to Caltech if you want to go to graduate school.</p>
<p>Go to Stanford if you want to go straight into industry. </p>
<p>That's a gross generalization, but it's still reasonably good advice.</p>
<p>that might be a good way of looking at it actually</p>
<p>I would almost say that if you are sure you want to go to grad school you'd be doing yourself a bit of a disservice by not going to Caltech (just because of the research focus). If you want industry, Caltech would be fine and Stanford would also be fine--in that case I'd make the choice based on "fit", how much you value being in an academic community with lots of people doing non-science things vs. how much you like the Caltech culture of "building stuff" and so on.</p>
<p>What are your thoughts on football (and other sports)?
How important are girls to your college experience?
What financial aid offers did you get from both places (CT ~ slightly cheaper if none)
Do you ever find yourself annoyed by nerd-like behavior?</p>
<p>And as for "A few people I talked to from caltech said its the sciences where caltech stands out, not so much the engineering. I dont know...what do yall think?"</p>
<p>Typically you do hear Caltech is for the pure sciences and MIT is for engineering. This too is a gross generalization as both are awesome in the other field, but lets roll with it since its said and it gives you a base to start with. Now, As for fitting Stanford in, it is consistently ranked up there with MIT in engineering, usually higher than Caltech in engineering. Also, it has some BS/MS programs where you can get your masters degree within 5 years of matriculating as a freshman, which would be MUCH harder to do than Caltech and is worth looking into.</p>
<p>I am completely apathetical about sports
I like girls. Yeah Stanford girls are hotter and more abundant, but there are enough girls at Caltech to keep me occupied too.
No financial aid. Although CIT is slightly cheaper, its not enough to justify price as a reason for choosing it over stanford.
Nah, Im a nerd and id fit in well at Caltech. Anyone could fit in pretty well at Stanford too though.</p>
<p>I am almost positive I will want to do grad school after. Caltech does seem to have more focus on research but from everyone I talked to at Stanford, supposedly research opportunities are just as easy to find there. One materials science major i talked to at Stanford said his professor just out of the blue asked him if he wanted to do some research for Hitatchi over the summer. As for the BS/MS program at Stanford, it would most likely be useless for me since I think id go on to grad school right away. There is perhaps the small chance Id take a couple of years off to go work or just forget about getting a PhD completely, but I doubt it. It is a nice option to have though I guess. Pretty much everyone I talked to in engineering at Stanford was doing the coterm program.</p>
<p>"No financial aid. Although CIT is slightly cheaper, its not enough to justify price as a reason for choosing it over stanford."</p>
<p>But if you are completely deadlocked between 2 things. having 20k in your pocket after 4 years might be something to consider. You could use it to buy a car or something. </p>
<p>Truthfully if I were apathetic about sports I probably would chose Caltech over Stanford (which I am and I would), then again when I was 12 the Stanford Mascot made very lewd gestures towards me during the Rose Bowl.</p>
<p>Stanford's mascot is a Tree. Caltech's mascot is a Beaver.</p>
<p>Beavers chop down trees.</p>
<p>"Pretty much everyone I talked to in engineering at Stanford was doing the coterm program."</p>
<p>This is a pretty good indication that the majority of Stanford engineers intend to go straight to industry, since coterm programs make little sense if you want to go to grad school.</p>
<p>why doens't co-term programs make sense if one wants to do grad school? it saves a year (I think many thesis masters degree require 2 years?)
of course, doing co-term means you're not doing PhD (in most cases)</p>
<p>I was wondering...are those 5-year BS/MS programs usually not as in-depth/comprehensive as someone who do all of undergrad and go to a complete grad masters program?</p>
<p>It was mentioned in another thread, but in a 5 year co-term program, you pay tuition during your 5th (Master's) year. If you go straight from your B.S. to a grad school, then you (normally) won't have to pay tuition for the Master's year, or for any year after that. Besides that, there isn't much difference. Some Master's programs are 1 year, and some are 2. I wouldn't think that a 5-year program is any less comprehensive than spending 4 years on a B.S. and 1 or 2 on an M.S.</p>
<p>there are no tuition for a masters degree???</p>
<p>As an engineer at Caltech, you'll probably have to take more math and physics than anywhere else - a rigorous theoretical background is required just to graduate. Do you really want to do Caltech core? In addition to the two years of math and physics required for all Caltech undergrads, all engineering majors also have to take ACM 95, which is a year-long, fast-paced, work-intensive math class. For me, the Caltech core was a huge plus. It might not be for someone who would never want to take, say, proof-based calculus or quantum mechanics...</p>
<p>There is usually no tuition for a masters degree if you are doing it on the way to a PhD. Otherwise I think it costs some amount of money. </p>
<p>Core physics consists of a year of classical mechanics and electromagnetism, a couple terms on waves, quantum physics, and thermodynamics/statistical mechanics. Other courses include single and multi-variable calculus, linear algebra, differential equations, probability and statistics, and general chemistry and some biology class or other (it's currently "The Biophysics of Viruses"). While some majors (like electrical, mechanical, aeronautical engineering or CS) won't necessarily use the chemistry or biology explicitly, those subjects do provide insight into different ways of looking at systems. They also provide a little bit of a lower-level background in certain physical phenomena, as well as providing you with a basic knowledge of the subjects enabling you to learn more about them easily at a later date if you so desire. </p>
<p>For the majors you're considering, it seems to me that all the math is useful. Regardless of whether you need to use classical mechanics or electromagnetism, I think physics makes you smarter. Waves and thermodynamics are probably useful in electrical engineering, aeronautical engineering, and chemical engineering. Quantum physics may be useful in electrical and chemical engineering. Mechanical engineering has its own year-long thermodynamics course. If you end up choosing applied physics, all of core is useful due to the fact that at Caltech APh has a lot of cross-department collaboration and thus APh majors can do research in many topics. </p>
<p>I asked a computer science major about Ph 2, and he said that many concepts from waves are applied in computer science, but quantum physics and thermodynamics are interesting but not broadly applicable to the field. (I'd imagine they might be useful if you wanted to look into quantum computation)</p>
<p>Yeah, co-term programs are basically cash cows. I really wouldn't consider them.</p>
<p>what about MIT's 5-year BS/MS programs in EECS?
for example, the VI-A internship program.
are they cash cows?</p>
<p>besides, if you're doing PhD, you dont have to pay tuition?</p>
<p>Students don't pay grad schools to get a Ph.D; rather, grad schools pay students to do research for them, and in doing so, get a Ph.D.</p>
<p>Yes. In the sciences coming from a top school it's usual for anything beyond the BS to be free (with the exception of med school or law school of course). MS/PhD can be paid for with fellowships and assistantships.</p>